Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-26-2012, 10:36 AM
 
2,023 posts, read 5,312,328 times
Reputation: 2004

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by muleskinner View Post
LMAO...yes and then put a 16 yo behind the wheel with it grossing about 30 tons with corn falling off all around the bed and a 5x4 tranny in it and send him towards town in it...see how well all THAT works out.

I don't think it would pull out of it's own tracks if you want to know the truth.
I've driven 283 Chevys, 272 y block Fords, and 304 Internationals in this type of application and they all seem to be quite capable in this type of work so it would be nice to see how well that modern Mustang engine would do in comparison. Those dual transmission trucks are kind of a pain to drive so that would be funny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-26-2012, 10:46 AM
 
2,023 posts, read 5,312,328 times
Reputation: 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDD View Post
I'll put my Powerstroke up against your FE while pulling a trailer with my 5.0 inside.

Stop making silly analogies.
Then stop saying the FE Ford is inferior to the modern Mustang engine when the FE series engines were and are used in both Mustangs and industrial applications. My pickup has a 385 series based engine in it and it doesn't require a turbo to make its power either not to mention I built it myself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2012, 10:52 AM
PDD
 
Location: The Sand Hills of NC
8,773 posts, read 18,385,103 times
Reputation: 12004
Quote:
Originally Posted by muleskinner View Post
Reread your post...what is obvious is you did not know the 444 had been used for ever IN a grain truck...hilarious...so if you own one you become an expert I guess...I'll have to remember that rule of thumb next time I buy something
Who gives a crap it was used in a grain truck,school bus, deliver truck or any number of trucks.
Moderator cut: Off Topic

Last edited by TheViking85; 02-27-2012 at 06:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2012, 11:22 AM
 
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,078,355 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by 73-79 ford fan View Post
I've driven 283 Chevys, 272 y block Fords, and 304 Internationals in this type of application and they all seem to be quite capable in this type of work so it would be nice to see how well that modern Mustang engine would do in comparison. Those dual transmission trucks are kind of a pain to drive so that would be funny.
Yes they are...the main problem is about the time you get going good,you'll miss a gear and have to start from the ground up again...not a lot of fun if your friends are watching
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2012, 03:37 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,832,973 times
Reputation: 20030
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteboyslo View Post
Wasn't the 390 a 'FE' block, not a 'Y' block?

Mike
yes the 390 is an FE engine, however, it is also a Y block design as it has the deep skirts of the Y block small blocks.

as to which is better, imo the 396 chevy is the better engine as it is a much newer design. it came around in the mid 60s where as the FE engines dated back to the late 50s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2012, 04:01 PM
 
Location: My little patch of Earth
6,193 posts, read 5,367,423 times
Reputation: 3059
The 409 still enjoys a following.

Use a 427 or 454 crank, add a set of aluminum heads (and or even a block), and you have one wild screaming engine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2012, 05:04 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,832,973 times
Reputation: 20030
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrench409 View Post
The 409 still enjoys a following.

Use a 427 or 454 crank, add a set of aluminum heads (and or even a block), and you have one wild screaming engine.
the 409 is a different design from the 396-454. parts will not interchange.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2012, 05:32 PM
 
Location: South Jersey
7,780 posts, read 21,876,438 times
Reputation: 2355
Quote:
Originally Posted by 73-79 ford fan View Post
Someone should put that 2011 or 2012 Mustang engine in a medium duty grain truck or dump truck if they want to compare them to the FE/FT engines to see what that little twerp engine is made of.
They do, In the F150 pick up. 360 hp and 380 ft lbs torque. Way more then any 390 ever had. Rated at 10,000 lbs trailer load.. Im sure it can pull a bit more but its not a heavy duty pickup. Its only a 3/4 ton. The F250 has a 6.2(376 cubes) v8 with 385 hp and 405 torque that is more then any v8 Ford had in the 60's in a truck. (remember net hp/torque vs gross) and its rated at 15,400 lbs top towing capacity and again it can tow a lot more easy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2012, 06:13 PM
 
Location: My little patch of Earth
6,193 posts, read 5,367,423 times
Reputation: 3059
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
the 409 is a different design from the 396-454. parts will not interchange.
Big block cranks can easily be machined to run in 409 blocks.

The 63 427 lower end was based on the 409. From there the 65 396 was born and bigger came first and later.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2012, 02:59 AM
 
Location: Wellsville, Glurt County
2,845 posts, read 10,509,676 times
Reputation: 1417
I have no dog in this fight whatsoever, but I did wanna mention that I've always thought the early 390s were very cool for their time. In 1961, Ford debuted the 390 dealer option tri-carb setup that was allegedly good for 401hp going head-to-head with Chevy's brand new 409 making 1hp/cubic inch (all SAE Gross, of course). Pretty good year for big blocks and fullsize cars! Also fairly amazing technology for the time, considering that ten years earlier Straight-8s and flatheads were still pretty much the norm. Chevy's big block was undoubtedly better, but I love the sleek looks of those '61-'62 Fords...

Question for the Ford guys - was the 427 SOHC ever available in a factory product you could buy at a dealership, or was it purely a racing engine sold over the counter?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:40 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top